Feature request: Make the insatller too

[Altiano]

why not combine this with electron-builder.. so that we also have the installer..

[vrunoa]

cool idea @Altiano , i'll try to make same implementation next week

[Altiano]

great.. I'll be waiting for it 👍

[Cryptix23]

+1 I would like this option a lot too. !

[dorianpula]

@vrunoa Any luck with adding in the electron-builder bit?

[develar]

@dorianpula I doubt that is it is required. electron-builder allows you to just use convention, infers a lot of data from package.json, allows to specify configuration in the package.json build. So, such wizard is not required. See https://github.com/develar/onshape-desktop-shell/blob/master/package.json for example.

[dorianpula]

@develar Ah ok. I'll take a look at the example. I ran into some issues using plain old electron-packager which may be caused by my use of electron-prebuilt-compile (since I'd like to use some of the draft features from es2015). Using epi made things work. Hopefully getting setup in electron-builder will be easier.

[vrunoa]

@dorianpula @develar sorry for the late late reply. I'm really busy with some deadlines I couldn't reach out to even read about electron-builder module. As soon as I can I would give you feedback. PR's are welcomed 😉

[dorianpula]

Thanks @develar I got electron-builder to work, and it does exactly what I need it to do! I didn't have to do anything fancy, outside of tricky issue with the way the Linux build handles icons.

@vrunoa having an interactive setup to configure electron-builder and update a target package.json would be nice, and it would most likely replace the need for dealing with electron-packager directly.

[develar]

it would most likely replace the need for dealing with electron-packager directly.

if you use electron-builder, you don't need to use electron-packager.

tricky issue with the way the Linux build handles icons.

You can always create plain old folder of icons and don't rely on icns transform.

having an interactive setup to configure electron-builder and update a target package.json would be nice

Any possible scenario, please. Why it is more convenient than just edit your package.json by hand?

[Altiano]

@develar
Any possible scenario, please. Why it is more convenient than just edit your package.json by hand?

I think it's just a matter of personal preferences. Some people love interaction more than configuration in some cases.